Regarding these Firearm Freedom Acts...as the 1942 case Wickard vs. Filburn showed, the Federal Government can and will use the Commerce Clause to regulate intrastate as well as interstate commerce. Until the referenced case is overthrown (or until the Feds actually start abiding by the original intent of the Constitution), these States' efforts, while certainly well intentioned, are also certainly doomed to fail.
Keith
Keith,
The idea here is to send a message to washington that we won't stand for them regulating what is ours to regulate. That we aren't OK with the way things are done. If even half the states send this message, they will realize that people are fed up. Yes, they use money to regulate us. That's the whole problem. Have you heard the argument that people don't understand why the legal drinking age is 21? Want to know why that is? The government forced it. They simply stated they will pull funding for roads that won't be save if drunk 18 year olds are driving on them. I think it Vermont or Connetitcut that put up a long fight on this and finally gave in. Because roads are expensive. It's extortion!
Texas just stood up last week and told the feds, we are sick of you trying to regulate and force "no child left behind", which is a huge failure. They told them to take their money and shove it.
For the FFA guy that started the thread, I spoke with you that weekend. Good to see you here. I am for it. Let me look at some of these threads you have posted and get some information and I will help with some feedback. Don't let money or interstate commerce regulate your rights. Take back what was intended to be our rights (state regulation of these things). I love Texas for this. You have to be willing to fund yourself though. It can be done. I will be watching them to see how this pans out.
Thank you guys for starting this. (I am the one that talked about the initiative alternative to pushing this through)